State v. Valdez

Citations

• 2017 Ohio 4260

Syllabus

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW/CRIMINAL - COUNSEL - APPELLATE REVIEW/CRIMINAL: The municipal court did not abuse its discretion in overruling defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea to misdemeanor domestic violence on the ground that his plea had been the unintelligent product of his trial counsel's ineffectiveness in advising him concerning the immigration consequences of his conviction: the motion was reviewable under Crim.R. 32.1 and counsel had a duty under Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356, 130 S.Ct. 1473, 176 L.Ed.2d 284 (2010), to accurately advise defendant that, with his conviction, his removal was presumptively mandatory but the record cannot be said to demonstrate that withdrawal was necessary to correct manifest injustice, when the municipal court, in deciding the motion, did not have before it a transcript of the plea hearing. [But see DISSENT: Manifest injustice can be established on facts supplied through the affidavit attached to the motion. Since the trial court did not consider whether defendant was prejudiced, this court should not address merits for the first time on appeal and instead should remand the case to the trial court for consideration of this issue.]